Thursday, 23 September 2010

Right-wing blogs. We still exist Iain!

So, it seems Iain Dale is worried about the future of the Right-wing blogosphere. Fired up by a disappointing drop in conservative blogs in the latest TotalPoliticics Blog Awards list, he used his column yesterday to ask where the next generation of right-wing bloggers were, and why there had been a drop in interest from that side of the spectrum.

"The comparative decline of the right is not because existing right-wing blogs have been performing badly, it is because there has been no new blood."

I think one of the commentors on his post had it right. When your Party is in power, the impetus to blog about what you disagree with is considerably weakened. Put simply, the anger isn’t there. Rather than risk blogs becoming tribalist lists of real (or imagined) success, they instead become defunct.

Some events can re-fire interest. The Blue Guerilla came out of mothballs for this summer’s Conservative Future election campaign, as to a certain extent did London Spin. They helped fill a gap in the ‘Tory yoof’ stakes created by Tory Bear’s seeming lack of blogging time. Once the results are announced next week, though, it will be interesting to see if they keep up the pace. As I have found, time for blogging is generally short, particularly when you have a day job outside politics, and a demanding toddler!

Anyway, if Iain Dale is putting out a call to action, then I’m stepping up to the plate. I may not have the most impeccable of national sources to send stories my way, but nonetheless toes will be dipped outside the calm waters of Epsom slightly more often from now on. Iain, fancy giving me your little black book?

Wednesday, 22 September 2010

The Big Society - A Flower Bed Too Far?

The Big Society was always one of the more diaphanous elements of the Conservative manifesto in the recent General Election. Ostensively a codification of previous attempts to conjoin local government and local community groups, it has been described as the Conservative Manifesto’s ‘Big Idea’ as well as an easy way to get cuts in through the back door.

Personally, I have always been a fan of the idea. The concept that community groups, charities, and NGOs should be more involved in the delivery of local services is not new, but if it is to succeed in any measurable way, the involvement of Westminster is welcome. Local Councils too, I had imagined, would be fans of the scheme. In the face of declining government grants, any chance to use interested parties to ensure the money goes further would be welcome. It seems, in Epsom and Ewell at least, I was wrong.

I have blogged previously about the recent Hub project – an excellent example of the ethos of the Big Society in action. A post on the Epsom Conservatives blog – run by Conservative Leader on the Borough Council, Sean Sullivan – the other day seemed to offer up another potential scheme; gardening. With less money available for landscaping in the Borough, why not get local groups involved? Hey, it worked for Newsnight!

It seems, though, that my suggestion of getting local groups involved to assist the Council in keeping its flower beds up to scratch didn’t go down too well with Liberal Democrat Councillor Anna Jones










Not a believer in the Big Society, it would seem.

Personally, I see only positives in using the talents and interests of the local community to help the shrinking Council budget to stretch further. I’m not talking about getting local residents in to replace redundant public servants. I’m merely saying if we muck in here, they can focus their time more efficiently in other areas.

For the record Anna, time allowing, I would be willing to help out in any way I can. As far as school dinners go I’ll even cook the pudding. We could call it Jamie’s School Dinners?

LateRooms 'gets' Social Media

It is always a pleasant surprise to see a company using social media and the ‘net to their fullest advantage when it comes to identifying and adressing customer needs and, more importantly, customer issues.

A few weeks ago, I booked a hotel in Birmingham for the Party Conference through laterooms.com. Places to stay during Conference are like hen's teeth, so I was very happy to find somewhere about a mile or so away, and at a reasonable price to boot.

All seemed well, until I got a call from a rather apologetic lady at the hotel in question saying that she was very sorry, but they were full on one of the nights I had requested. They had told LateRooms this, and they had no idea why I had still been able to book it.

After cursing my luck, checking online, and phoning around, I managed to get a booking for B&B just down the road for the entire stay, and cancelled my previous booking (at no charge thankfully).

Skip forward a couple of weeks. Up pops conservative blogger Tory Bear, mentioning that (as ever!) he had no accommodation yet. I sent the following tweets:





The next morning, I got this:




Needless to say, I have written them an e-mail, letting them know that despite the problem I had I am suitably impressed with their use of Twitter. Far too often we see examples of companies using social media incredibly badly – this one springs particularly to mind. Here, however, we see a company willing to use new methods of communication to engage with their customer base, and ensure their concerns are addressed. Well done LateRooms. Just make sure your availability is updated more often next time, eh?

Monday, 13 September 2010

Paleolithic politics

I have watched the grandstanding from the TUC over the past few days with a sense of both sadness and deja vu.

I fully understand the right of individuals to petition their employers for improvements in circumstance and pay. When, however, Bob Crow can stand at the lectern and call for a campaign of 'civil disobedience' in the face of cuts that all Parties agreed were necessary to differing degrees, and garner support from the floor, then something is deeply wrong.

Yesterday, Mark Serwotka - head of the PCS Union - called for not only a moratorium on public sector job cuts, but even an increase in public sector funding to lift us out of recession. Failing to see that it will be the private sector - in particular small/medium enterprise within this sector - that will most likely provide the growth we so need, misses the point entirely and risks a further decline into deficit and debt.

The most glaring hole in the Unionist argument has been posed very effectively by City Unslicker - what would they do instead? In the face of almost unilateral agreement on the necessity of spending cuts - Labour's plan was to halve the deficit within four years - how would they ensure their aims?

The Unions obviously feel that the time has come to show their hand. It remains to be seen whether the result is similar to that of 1974, where industrial action had the result of bringing down the Government, or of the early 1980s, where the Unions' power was crushed by a government organised and determined enough to face them down.

Friday, 3 September 2010

The 'Big Society' hits Epsom

There is a shop in the very centre of Epsom, next to Marks and Spencer, that has been lying empty for months. Previously a newsagent, the family who owned it evidently decided they could make more profit by moving from a shop to a market stall and so moved out into the square next door. Until last week the shop was abandoned, with only a mysterious planning application from the Council, stating an intended use of the space for the disabled, joining a couple of leftover newspapers and some junk mail as decoration.

I say 'until last week' because seemingly overnight it has had a fresh coat of paint, new carpet, a security blind fitted, and is now seemingly to be known as 'The Hub'. The Hub, opening 13th September, is "a drop-in First Stop Shop for information, advice, advocacy and other services, which will be run by disabled people for disabled people and carers."

The service has been developed by local voluntary groups, local charities, and the Borough/County Council. It will be staffed by volunteers, both disabled and non-disabled, and will "help improve access to local sources; and to promote the rights of disabled people to equal opportunities and independent living."
















Two things make me very happy about The Hub. Firstly, the concept of Local Government and charities/community groups coming together to provide useful services at a reduced cost is exactly what the Conservative Party had in mind when they were trying to put across what their Big Society message meant. The message may not have been defined to everyone's satisfaction, but it is great to see projects like this up and running.

Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, it shows that there is at least some impetus to improve disabled services in Epsom. Coming in the face of the parking charges recently levied by the Borough Council, it is good to see action behind their talk of also improving provision for those with disabilities. Good stuff.

Thursday, 5 August 2010

Publicity costs in Epsom

When Epsom and Ewell Borough Council posted their annual accounts for public consumption last month, there were some curious omissions. Not least the fact that, for some reason, officers were not keen to detail any publicity costs for the Council over the past year. A few well-placed questions from our local paper later, and the reason becomes more clear. At the same time as cutting services for its residents, our Council is spending £54,000 a year to outsource its newsletter to an external agency…which is then charging them to advertise in their own publication.

A month ago, the Local Government Secretary Eric Pickles announced a toughening up of rules regarding council newsletters. His goal is to ensure that local newspapers are not put out of business by tax payer-funded publications. Indicating that Council-authored papers increase junk mail, and undermine the free press, Pickles said:

"Councils should spend less time and money on weekly town hall Pravdas that end up in the bin, and focus more on frontline services like providing regular rubbish collections.”

I couldn’t agree more. The situation is even more exasperating in Epsom, however, as the company which won the tender to produce our local ‘Borough Insight’ (EM Communications) claims the Council specifically asked them to price advertising separately from the production and distribution costs of the paper. As the Epsom Guardian reports, the Council voted against allowing commercial organisations to advertise in the Insight to drive down costs. Instead, EM Communications only accepts Council-sponsored adverts, charging the Town Hall £150 for each one.

At an approximate cost of £10,000 per issue, the Epsom and Ewell ‘Pravda’ is a luxury this Council can no longer afford. If Eric isn’t looking hard at Epsom and Ewell Borough Council now, I’m guessing he soon will be. I think the Council’s Liberal Democrat Leader Julie Morris put it best:

“Spending £54,000 each year on a publication which, for the most part, is very dull and merely props up the policies of those in control of the council, is no longer appropriate…£54,000 would offset quite a lot of the spending cuts this year, wouldn't it?”

(N.B. - links to Epsom Guardian story to follow once it is posted online)

Wednesday, 4 August 2010

Council Houses - It's good to talk...

Seems I picked a good time to upgrade my Twitter to Journotwit! Being able to organize searches more effectively by subject has allowed me to enjoy a veritable torrent of ‘nasty’, ‘Thatcherite’, and ‘back to the 80s’ tweets today. It seems that David Cameron’s comments on council housing at a Cameron Direct meeting yesterday have whipped up a particularly virulent storm with the left-wing Tweeters. Reading some of the comments, you’d be mistaken for thinking that the Cabinet are spending their recess running up and down the country, busting in the doors and kicking out the disadvantaged. Oh please…

I fully understand that the concept of a ‘home’ can be a very emotive one, and Government comment on it raises the same hackles as, say, over the BBC or NHS. However, when we find ourselves in a situation where there is not enough affordable housing in this country, but where the economy does not allow us to build more, surely it is a bit much to greet the mention of a potential policy with quite such a howl of horror?

The idea that someone can be granted a Council house ‘for life’ is problematic. Surely it is better to take a look at how an individual’s personal circumstances change over time, and then assess whether they still require the same level of assistance? This is, after all, what happens in terms of employment, incapacity and other housing benefits. Why should council housing be treated any differently?

The Guardian has a story which takes Cameron’s comments in the context of plans for a national house-swap scheme outlined by Housing Minister Grant Shapps today. There are currently 250,000 people in this country living in houses that are too small for their families, and 400,000 living in houses that are too big. This is not good enough, and the Government is failing the quarter of a million people who do not have sufficient room to live.

According to Paul Waugh, sources say that Cameron’s answer was merely an answer to an ‘emotive’ question at the Cameron Direct event; a comment on the benefits of such an idea rather than ‘a set-in-stone policy’. Personally, I hope that this mean that we can finally have a reasoned debate about the state of Council housing in this country and, even better, find a sensible way to move forward with managing it better.